camserials.org – find specific camera models from huge serial number pools

[Artingei]

Hi there. I just wanted to get my side project out to everyone interested and RFF seems to be a good place for it. I just published the first version of camserials.org which I created to learn some new tech/code techniques. The fully responsive web app finds data about vintage cameras( currently Leica only ) by serial number. I want to add more manufacturers but "data mining" is time consuming… Please note that I don't earn any money with this. It's just a "goodie" for the community. Take a look, play around and feel free to leave your feedback here. Looking forward to it!

Thanks,
Jonas

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Dear Jonas,

thank you very much!

I did know and use http://www.summilux.net/numeros/index.php so far, but your site gives additional informations that I appreciate, e.g.:

UNITS PRODUCED
1450

SERIAL START
1173251

SERIAL END
1174700

Very good!

 

[christopheradams]

Very nice that you put all the code on GitHub. good job!

If you edit the repo description you should add the website link there too.

 

[Artingei]

Very nice that you put all the code on GitHub. good job!

If you edit the repo description you should add the website link there too.

Thanks for your feedback and the suggestion regarding thegithub readme. I added the link.

 

[Artingei]

Dear Jonas,

thank you very much!

I did know and use http://www.summilux.net/numeros/index.php so far, but your site gives additional informations that I appreciate, e.g.:



Very good!

Oh, seems I didn't resarch well enough. Didn't expect something like this to exist. 🙂 Nice to hear this is more useful. I am also trying to add more informations to the Leica serials by linking to the l-camera-forum wiki, see this serial for example.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Nice to hear this is more useful. I am also trying to add more informations to the Leica serials by linking to the l-camera-forum wiki, see this serial for example.

Re this «wiki»: one should take it with a pinch of salt; they're not always that precise. Here and there they're completely nonsensical, cf. this thread here:

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2657313

 

[jaapv]

Re this «wiki»: one should take it with a pinch of salt; they're not always that precise. Here and there they're completely nonsensical, cf. this thread here:

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2657313

Is't that the case for all public-driven Wikis? It appears that the mistake you refer to has been corrected. Anyway, it is certainly a mistake to rely on Internet "authority". Better look in the publications of real experts like Lager or Puts, who have access to the factory records.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Is't that the case for all public-driven Wikis? It appears that the mistake you refer to has been corrected.

No, they're still talking about «Super-Angulon f= 2.1 cm 1:4» made in 1981; hilarious. [last revision was: 15:02, 4 August 2015‎ Tdavis (Talk | contribs)‎ m . . (3,879 bytes) (+17)‎.]

Anyway, it is certainly a mistake to rely on Internet "authority". Better look in the publications of real experts like Lager or Puts, who have access to the factory records.

Yes, of course. Or ask Dr. Bawendi, e.g.